The COMAC ARJ12 Vs Boeing 717 – How Do The Planes Compare?


With COMAC soon to bring the new ARJ12 to the market in some shape or form, one can’t help but draw comparisons to Boeing’s original regional jet attempt, the Boeing 717, back in the late 90s. How does the COMAC version compare? Let’s find out

COMAC ARJ21 vs Boeing 717. Photo: Simple Flying

Why are we comparing these two aircraft?

COMAC, the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, has been racing to develop a portfolio of commercial passenger aircraft to match the likes of Boeing and Airbus. In their current range, they are looking at two distinct markets. A 200-seater C919 to match the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 and the ARJ21, a 100-seater aircraft built to take on the A220 and Embraer E-Jet markets.


We have already covered how the ARJ21 compares to a modern 100-seater aircraft (The A220), but perhaps a more fair comparison would be how it matches Boeing’s first attempt at the 100-seater market back in the day; the Boeing 717.


There are actually two versions of the ARJ21; a 90-seater ARJ21-700, and a 105-seater ARJ21-900. We will use the latter model for comparison, as it better matches the capability of the Boeing 717. Regarding the 717-200 variants, there was actually an improved engine design version that significantly increased the range. We will be using this model for the comparison also.

COMAC ARJ21-900 vs Boeing 717

Here are the raw stats side by side.

Variant717-200 HGWARJ21-900 ER
Cockpit crewTwoTwo
2-class seating106 (8J+98Y @36–32 in and 91–81 cm)98 (36 in and 32 in)
1-class seating117Y@32 in (81 cm)31 in (105 cm)
Cargo730 ft³ (20.7 m³)711ft³ (20.14 m3)
Length124 ft 0 in (37.8 m)119 ft 3 in (36.35 m)
Wingspan93 ft 4 in (28.4 m)89 ft 6 in (27.28 m)
Height:29 ft 8 in (9.0 m)27 ft 8 in (8.44 m)
Cabin width123.8in (314.5cm)10 ft 4 in (314cm)
Max. takeoff:121,000 lb (54,884 kg)104,019 lb (47,182 kg)
Empty weight:68,500 lb (31,071 kg)59,020 lb (26,770 kg)
Fuel weight:29,500 lb (13,382 kg)22,897 lb (10,386 kg)
Turbofans (2×)Rolls Royce BR715-C1-30General Electric CF34-10A
Thrust (2×)21,430 lbf (95.3 kN)18,500 lbf (82 kN)
Ceiling37,000 ft (11,000 m)39,000 ft (11,900 m)
Cruise (34,200 ft)Mach 0.77 (822 km/h; 444 kn)Mach 0.78 (828 km/h, 447 kn)
Range2,060 nmi (3,815 km)1,800 nmi (3,300 km)


Looking at the passenger numbers, we can see that the default Boeing 717 carries more passengers onboard than the ARJ21. This is likely due to the longer length of the aircraft, Boeing simply has more room to put in more seats.

Winner: Boeing 717

Boeing 717
Air Tran was the launch customer of the Boeing 717. Photo: Airwim via Wikimedia


Looking at the range of the two aircraft, we can see that the ARJ21 ER actually beats the Boeing 717 at an extra 40 nautical miles (NMI / NM). This really isn’t a big distance and is a testament to an aircraft design from 30 years ago beating a modern creation. I’d be reluctant to award victory to the ARJ21 as it barely beats a plane that doesn’t have the benefit of modern technology (You can see how the ARJ21 compares to a real modern aircraft here).

It’s also worth pointing out that the normal ARJ21-900 (not the extended range version) only has a range of 1,800 nautical miles

Winner: ARJ21 ER

An ARJ-21 takes off. Photo: Peng Chen via Flickr

Which is best?

To try and choose between an aircraft built in the late nineties to one today might seem a bit unfair, but both Boeing and COMAC were at the same stages of their product development when these two aircraft hit their respective markets.

Will the ARJ21 sink or swim? Will it find a place in the market? Only time will tell.

What do you think? Which aircraft is best? Let us know in the comments.


Leave a Reply

2 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
3 Comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Matthew in PDX

The sink or swim will come down to several factors, including, but not limited to: cost per seat mile, the ability of COMAC to provide spare parts for its planes throughout the world, and licensing. During the Soviet era, the eastern bloc airplane manufacturers had real trouble supplying spares for their planes, so no airline that had a choice bought them.


The comparison table needs to be standardized please… Units listed in the same order with either a / or () not both.

Joanna Bailey

I agree, I’ve updated that for you